3 total
The court declined to award costs to a successful moving party in a child protection proceeding, finding the respondents acted reasonably.
This is a costs decision in a child protection proceeding under Part V of the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017.
The maternal grandmother sought costs of $16,528.92 against the father and paternal uncle following a successful motion to terminate the paternal uncle's overnight access to the children and restrict him to day access only.
The court dismissed the motion for costs, finding that although the maternal grandmother was successful on the motion, the circumstances of a child protection proceeding warranted no costs award.
The court held that parents should be entitled to vigorously defend themselves in child protection proceedings without fear of cost sanctions, and that costs should only be awarded in rare and exceptional circumstances.
Temporary access order varied to remove overnight access due to breaches of supervision conditions.
The maternal grandmother, who had custody of two young children, brought a motion to vary a temporary access order to change the paternal uncle's access from overnight to day access only.
The motion was supported by the Children's Aid Society and opposed by the paternal uncle and the father.
The maternal grandmother alleged that the paternal uncle breached the access conditions by allowing the father, who had substance abuse issues, to stay overnight and have unsupervised access.
The court found that the maternal grandmother met the onus of proving a change in circumstances, relying on the children's statements and a private investigator's report, and concluded that overnight access with the paternal uncle was no longer in the children's best interests.
The motion was granted.
A judge of the Ontario Court of Justice has the authority to issue a child apprehension warrant.
The Catholic Children's Aid Society sought a warrant to apprehend and return a child in care pursuant to subsection 41(1) of the Child and Family Services Act.
The child, age 13, had run away from foster care for the third time since July 2014.
The respondent mother supported the application.
The court determined that a judge of the Ontario Court of Justice has authority to issue such a warrant when acting as a justice of the peace under section 5 of the Justices of the Peace Act.
The evidence met the statutory test: the child was under 16, had left care without consent, and there were reasonable and probable grounds that no other course of action would adequately protect the child.
The warrant was granted.
